Mr_Anony:
Lol, was that the "explanation" you were talking about. Since when did "We don't know" and "anything could have happened" become compatible with a theory? Atheism of the gaps anyone?


Still does you no favours unless you are prepared to tell me that wormholes are spaceless


Atheism of the gaps again. . . .or maybe I really should say "multiverse of the gaps"


Red herring. This still wouldn't explain what is inbetween any two universes



Unfortunately, you have not given anything that begins to resemble a logical answer as to what exists outside universes. Also note that if the multiverse theory is true, then the big bang cannot be the origin of spacetime.or there is something outside spacetime which the many universes exist in.

I never said that the multiverse is true and so, how can it be "mulitverse of the gaps"?

I have always maintained that it is a hypothesis! Not a theory based tangible evidence!


You ask how it can be compatible with the big bang (if it were true)and I give you a time in the big bang, in which we dont know what happened- which people believe that universes could have existed in that time. After giving you the explanation you then complain that "we dont know" or "anything could have happened" is not a way to say that it is compatible with a theory!! How are you not reetarded for that? Where does a hypothesis start from?



Furthermore you should read up on wormholes as a hypothesis. They answer you question very well

Mr_Anony:
Lol @"let the big boys do the debate" why should I tell somebody else to shut up on a free forum? Could it be because he is making you uncomfortable by pointing out your logical errors to you?

Seriously? You are encouraging Reyginald with his foolishness?

You have no shame or morals

Logicboy03:

Ode, that was the point; what if there is no boundary, only distance?

If there is no boundary between any two entities, how can we say that they are distinct from each other? Do other universes exist intermingled with ours? If so, why can't we observe them? how do we know that they are particles from another universe?

Secondly, the moment you talk about distances between any two universes, you have referred to space between them. How can this be true if space itself originated from the big bang?

Logicboy03:


You are encouraging Reyginald

Reyginus please.

Logicboy03:
Seriously? You are encouraging Reyginald with his foolishness?

You have no shame or morals

Abeg commot for road joor. Anything that doesn't agree with you is "foolishness". How can you talk about distance if there is no space?

*Thinking* who knows what that boy is typing now*

mazaje: Anony on the other thread dropped the testimony of a doctor who claimed to have gone to heaven on the soul thread. . .The guy claimed there are is a multi universe when he visited heaven. . .He claimed he was shown that in heaven. . .He says that there are other universes, with less "evil" then ours, and that some are more technologically advanced. He is talking about how we are one of many universes with people living in it, and that our Earth, is a unique one spiriually in that it has more evil in it. However, if any of the other universes had people in them and anyone who had committed any sin, they would need a saviour. Would god also send his son through the process of being guilty for the world more then once again? Would he be able to go back to his position as a man on other planets as a physical body when his real body was up in heaven as the conquering king who had overcome sin and death, who held the keys of death and hades? He also tosses out that evil was made so that there could be free will. What does the bible say about other universes, and the things this man mentions? Does it line up with what is written in the bible?. . Not just the feelings of love and all the nice sounding stuff, but the actual ideas presented in his account. Does anony believe in the guy's(Dr. Eben Alexander) multi verse claim?. . .

red herring: eben alexander's story and whether I believe it or not is irrelevant to this thread.....I am not favouring either position on this thread.

My contention is simply that the big bang theory and the multiverse theory are not compatible. If you think they are, show it if not, go scratch your itch somewhere else.

Mr_Anony:
If there is no boundary between any two entities, how can we say that they are distinct from each other? Do other universes exist intermingled with ours? If so, why can't we observe them? how do we know that they are particles from another universe?

Secondly, the moment you talk about distances between any two universes, you have referred to space between them. How can this be true if space itself originated from the big bang?

1) What is in between the earth and mars? What is between our solar system and other solar system? Space. You need space for that distance, you trave through space. Now, how do you know that you're in another universe? The gravitational pull is different? the time-space relationship is a bit different? Aging has slowed down?


When you go into hypotheticals, anything is possible.


2) And the seconds immediately after the big bang?

cyrexx:
If really want to know about science, you know exctly where to go.

Stop these your silly and deliberately ignorant questions.

Ignorance about science is not a proof of your fairy tales

Yawn.....your poster is one of the most braven celebrations of ignorance I've seen so far. Commot for road make I pass joor.

Logicboy03:


1) What is in between the earth and mars? What is between our solar system and other solar system? Space. You need space for that distance, you trave through space. Now, how do you know that you're in another universe? The gravitational pull is different? the time-space relationship is a bit different? Aging has slowed down?


When you go into hypotheticals, anything is possible.


2) And the seconds immediately after the big bang?

Lololol.
1. We know space to be between the planets. That is easy even for the toddlers in science. As logical as you can get, you didnt see why it should it be so or you enjoy adorning the god of retardation with pretty laurels? The universe came with the big ba.ng right? With it came space. So what are you all about. Oh! Oh! Are you comparing the planets and your universes?
2. I don't follow.

Reyginus: Lololol.
1. We know space to be between the planets. That is easy even for the toddlers in science. As logical as you can get, you didnt see why it should it be so or you enjoy adorning the god of retardation with pretty laurels? The universe came with the big ba.ng right? With it came space. So what are you all about. Oh! Oh! Are you comparing the planets and your universes?
2. I don't follow.

Use your brain

2) And the seconds immediately after the big slam?

Just to remind the reetard reyginius;


I gave two answers

-wormholes
-distance, no boundaries

Logicboy03:

Use your brain

I'm trying to. You can still help me out if you think I'm not using it properly.

Logicboy03: Just to remind the reetard reyginius;


I gave two answers

-wormholes
-distance, no boundaries

A wormhole is any hole created by worms.:-).
Joke aside.
1. Mr logic, for a wormhole to exist, time and space dimensions must be present.
2. Still stubborn. Okay. Ponder on this question. Is it possible for their to be no boundary where their is distance?
Seen how contradictory you come?

Logicboy03:


1) What is in between the earth and mars? What is between our solar system and other solar system? Space. You need space for that distance, you trave through space. Now, how do you know that you're in another universe? The gravitational pull is different? the time-space relationship is a bit different? Aging has slowed down?

good. for the first time you are beginning to think. . .however I hope you do realize that you are not proposing a multiverse rather you are proposing a model of the universe where multiple cosmological constants apply in different areas of the same space. This would also contradict the big bang because the universe could not possibly have expanded while simultaneously respecting multiple cosmological constants.

It would mean that if for instance the gravitational constant had 10 different values (very very conservative number) acting at the same time, the singularity couldn't have expanded (or contracted) at the same time at 10 different simultaneous rates i.e. nothing would have banged.

or maybe there was no singularity but a multiplicity all banging separately to separate cosmological constants. This would literally mean multiple universes 'far apart' because if they are 'close together' and all expand the same space, then we won't have any coherent laws of nature acting on things. They will all be jumbled up within the same realm.

or maybe after the big bang, multiple other bangs took place within the universe but then the laws that will govern their 'banging' would be determined by the nature laws dominating the universe that they are banging in. So they won't result in another universe and will be a mere explosion within the present universe.

Either way you look at it, your multiverse explanation doesn't sit well with the big bang theory.

When you go into hypotheticals, anything is possible.

Not really, it must be logically coherent.

2) And the seconds immediately after the big bang?

What about them?

Mr_Anony:
good. for the first time you are beginning to think. . .however I hope you do realize that you are not proposing a multiverse rather you are proposing a model of the universe where multiple cosmological constants apply in different areas of the same space. This would also contradict the big bang because the universe could not possibly have expanded while simultaneously respecting multiple cosmological constants.

[b]It would mean that if for instance the gravitational constant had 10 different values (very very conservative number) acting at the same time, the singularity couldn't have expanded (or contracted) at the same time at 10 different simultaneous rates i.e. nothing would have banged.

or maybe there was no singularity but a multiplicity all banging separately to separate cosmological constants. This would literally mean multiple universes 'far apart' because if they are 'close together' and all expand the same space, then we won't have any coherent laws of nature acting on things. They will all be jumbled up within the same realm.

or maybe after the big bang, multiple other bangs took place within the universe but then the laws that will govern their 'banging' would be determined by the nature laws dominating the universe that they are banging in. So they won't result in another universe and will be a mere explosion within the present universe.
[/b]

Either way you look at it, your multiverse explanation doesn't sit well with the big bang theory.



Not really, it must be logically coherent.



What about them?

Everything in bold is bullshyt!


Sorry, if you feel like talking nonsense, play with Reyginius.


WTF is this;
I hope you do realize that you are not proposing a multiverse rather you are proposing a model of the universe where multiple cosmological constants apply in different areas of the same space.



or WTF is this
It would mean that if for instance the gravitational constant had 10 different values (very very conservative number) acting at the same time, the singularity couldn't have expanded (or contracted) at the same time at 10 different simultaneous rates i.e. nothing would have banged.





If you want to pull things out of your azz, go do it elsewhere

Logicboy03:



Everything in bold is bullshyt!


Sorry, if you feel like talking nonsense, play with Reyginius.


WTF is this;
I hope you do realize that you are not proposing a multiverse rather you are proposing a model of the universe where multiple cosmological constants apply in different areas of the same space.



or WTF is this
It would mean that if for instance the gravitational constant had 10 different values (very very conservative number) acting at the same time, the singularity couldn't have expanded (or contracted) at the same time at 10 different simultaneous rates i.e. nothing would have banged.





If you want to pull things out of your azz, go do it elsewhere

Wow! you have just exposed your ignorance......and to think that I thought that you had some vague idea of what you were discussing about! smh

Mr_Anony: and to think that I thought that you had some vague idea of what you were discussing about! smh

Lololol. This almost gave me a stomach ache.

Mr_Anony:
Yawn.....your poster is one of the most braven celebrations of ignorance I've seen so far. Commot for road make I pass joor.

LOL,

and your op question is one the most dubious and silly I've seen recently.

Abeg, shift go one side jare. Your anonysm tactics of asking silly questions has been detected and defused.

Mr_Anony:
red herring: eben alexander's story and whether I believe it or not is irrelevant to this thread.....I am not favouring either position on this thread.

My contention is simply that the big bang theory and the multiverse theory are not compatible. If you think they are, show it if not, go scratch your itch somewhere else.

It is very relevant to this topic. . .You gave his testimony on another thread as evidence of the soul and life after death because he stated that he went to heaven. In his testimony he stated that in heaven he was shown that there is a multiverse by god and his guide in heaven. . .Do you believe that his story is true?. . .This topic is about multi verse, no?. . .

It is a pity that such an interesting topic has been turned into a to and fro of "you don't know but I haven't got a clue."

The theory of the big bang raises many questions and that of multiverse is still in imaginations. But that is us humans. We imagine things and test them.

When you start really thinking about it, the big bang makes no sense in a single universe. The big bang can only make sense when applied to a multiverse system.

Mr Anony asks what is between universes? This question supposes that there is "something" known to and understood by us, between these verses. Have you considered that there may actually be something between verses that are nothing like what we know? Have you considered scenarios where there is "nothing" between the verses? Like two rooms with a sliding door separating them; when this door is open, we still have two rooms but nothing between them.

Another hypothesis is that there actually is a single infinite universe without beginning. Just space with a lot of things in it going on forever. Imagine some of these "things" in it exploding (BANGG!) from time to time. And these explosions destroying what was there previously and "creating" new things, like galaxies, planets etc. And imagine that we are inside one of these explosions.

Even this theory of a singular infinite universe eventually leads to multiverse because in space, there is a finite number of ways in which objects can be arranged. This means that within a given space, after all possible arrangements have been exhausted, any new arrangement in another space will be an exact copy of one of the arrangements in the previous space.

Thus, it could be that right now, there are trillions of Advocate666 writing exactly this same thing in response to trillions of Mr_Anony in trillions of multiverses. The magic of infinity.

advocate666: It is a pity that such an interesting topic has been turned into a to and fro of "you don't know but I haven't got a clue."

The theory of the big bang raises many questions and that of multiverse is still in imaginations. But that is us humans. We imagine things and test them.

When you start really thinking about it, the big bang makes no sense in a single universe. The big bang can only make sense when applied to a multiverse system.

Mr Anony asks what is between universes? This question supposes that there is "something" known to and understood by us, between these verses. Have you considered that there may actually be something between verses that are nothing like what we know? Have you considered scenarios where there is "nothing" between the verses? Like two rooms with a sliding door separating them; when this door is open, we still have two rooms but nothing between them.

Another hypothesis is that there actually is a single infinite universe without beginning. Just space with a lot of things in it going on forever. Imagine some of these "things" in it exploding (BANGG!) from time to time. And these explosions destroying what was there previously and "creating" new things, like galaxies, planets etc. And imagine that we are inside one of these explosions.

Even this theory of a singular infinite universe eventually leads to multiverse because in space, there is a finite number of ways in which objects can be arranged. This means that within a given space, after all possible arrangements have been exhausted, any new arrangement in another space will be an exact copy of one of the arrangements in the previous space.

Thus, it could be that right now, there are trillions of Advocate666 writing exactly this same thing in response to trillions of Mr_Anony in trillions of multiverses. The magic of infinity.

Anony has no idea what he is asking about. I gave him answers that he didnt expect. The distance hypothesis was just something i formed on my own....he then goes to pull nonsense out of his azzhole to claim that my hypothesis isnt logical. Note how he evaded the wormhole hypothesis as well.



Anony made this thread so that he could trip atheists on some difficult question he found on his apologist research. Just like Frosble's thread, it misfired

Mr_Anony:
Lol, I'll explain it to you in a nutshell:

The universe is believed to have started because of the big bang which is said to be the origin of space and time. Usually when a theist argues the that if space and time began to exist, then the cause of space and time must be one that transcends space and time.(Kalam cosmological argument)
The atheist usually disagrees saying that it is impossible to make sense of any being that is spaceless and timeless.

The next argument that a theist presents is that the fine-tuning of the universe in the sense that the universe follows a very specific order is an indication that the universe has a designer.
The atheist usually counters by citing the multiverse theory which is that the universe is not alone but is part of an infinitely large number of universes ordered in many different ways.

The counter isn't necessarily the concept of the multiverse, but that the universe had to have some values. Now if you're assuming that those values are that way just for humans come on the scene, then that is simply a lot of hubris and an example of puddle thinking.

Mr_Anony:
I believe that the big bang theory contradicts the multiverse theory because if space and time started locally in each universe, then whatever is inbetween any two universes cannot possibly be space so what is it?

That isn't contradictory if you allow that between universes, there is no space. Even if we assume that there's only this universe, one cannot say that it is expanding into space.

Mr_Anony:
It seems to me that on one hand the atheist denies that a spaceless and timeless realm exists but on the other hand indirectly admits spaceless and timeless realm when he/she cites the multiverse theory (which by the way has no scientific proof/evidence whatsoever). I am really interested in finding out how his/her explanation for reality works.

Do you follow?

The problem with the theist's idea is talking about a mind that exists without time and space. Our knowledge of minds don't simply allow for such concepts. Or do you wish to claim that your God exists in the void between the various universes?

Thehomer dear thehomer,

where have you been?

We miss you around here.

cyrexx: Thehomer dear thehomer,

where have you been?

We miss you around here.

I've just been a bit busy though I'm freer now so I can engage more with the numerous theists here.

thehomer:


I've just been a bit busy though I'm freer now so I can engage more with the numerous theists here.

Good to know and I am really happy to hear this from you.

baby atheist says:

Dady

cyrexx: Thehomer dear thehomer,

where have you been?

We miss you around here.

and Dady atheist says

thehomer:


I've just been a bit busy though I'm freer now so I can engage more with the numerous theists here.

it makes no difference.

Btw. Good to see therhomer, after a long time though.

and baby atheist is happy and all smiles

cyrexx:


Good to know and I am really happy to hear this from you.

one happy family.

^^
@truthislight,

hahaha

now that is just funny

Reyginus: Lololol. This almost gave me a stomach ache.

It is just sad because that was one post where I actually tried to understand him. I felt he had really touched on something and was trying to articulate it but just didn't know how to say it properly. Little did I know that he had absolutely no idea what he was talking about.

cyrexx:

LOL,

and your op question is one the most dubious and silly I've seen recently.

Abeg, shift go one side jare. Your anonysm tactics of asking silly questions has been detected and defused.

Lolololol.............isn't it funny how you shout "anonyism" anytime a difficult question is posed at you?

My dear cyrexx, there are some things that you are ignorant about. A person does not automatically become "dubious" just because he/she asked a question that exposed such ignorance on your part.

mazaje:

It is very relevant to this topic. . .You gave his testimony on another thread as evidence of the soul and life after death because he stated that he went to heaven. In his testimony he stated that in heaven he was shown that there is a multiverse by god and his guide in heaven. . .Do you believe that his story is true?. . .This topic is about multi verse, no?. . .

Red herring. Irrelevant to this thread.